The document summarizes findings from a study on the well-being of midlife New Zealanders aged 40-64. It finds that higher well-being is associated with good health, higher income and education, home ownership, social connections, and safety. Poverty is more likely for those who are single, widowed or divorced. Home ownership and universal superannuation are critical protections against poverty for older New Zealanders, but both may be threatened by changing social and economic conditions.

1. The Impact of Poverty on Wellbeing during Midlife Charles Waldegrave, The Family Centre Social Policy Research Unit, Lower Hutt, Wellington Michael P Cameron, Populations Study Centre and Department of Economics, University of Waikato Presentation to New Zealand Psychological Society Annual Conference 2010, Rydges Hotel, Rotorua, Tuesday 20 July 2010

3. Charles Waldegrave & Peggy Koopman-Boyden (Eds) Authors: Ben Amey, Michael Cameron, Peter King, Peggy Koopman-Boyden, Ian Pool, Suzan van der Pas and Charles Waldegrave Midlife New Zealanders Aged 40-64 in 2008: Enhancing Wellbeing in an Ageing Society © The Family Centre Social Policy Research Unit www.familycentre.org.nz Population Studies Centre University of Waikato Enhancing Wellbeing in an Ageing Society (EWAS) Research Programme Directors: Richard Bedford and Charles Waldegrave The Family Centre Social Policy Research Unit, Lower Hutt, Wellington and the Population Studies Centre, University of Waikato, Hamilton Funded by the Foundation for Research, Science and Technology Official Launch hosted by the Families Commission 14 August 2010

4. The research programme included two large scale national random sample surveys of independent and semi-independent New Zealanders between the ages of 65 and 84 years, and between 40 and 64 years. Enhancing Wellbeing in an Ageing Society (Koopman-Boyden & Waldegrave (Eds), 2009) has already documented the initial results from the survey of the 65-84 year-old New Zealanders. This publication presents the first results of the 40-64 year-old survey. The study provides the first comprehensive set of results of a national random sample of midlife New Zealanders. A fuller understanding of the baby-boomer and Gen X generations who are about to become superannuitants.

5. The aim of the research was to “ provide the understanding that is essential for policy formulation and the delivery of services for enhancing wellbeing in an ageing New Zealand society” .

6. The theoretical background and conceptualisation of wellbeing combines a subjective sense of satisfaction with Amartya Sen’s notion of the capability to access resources and to do something with them. Wellbeing in this research involves people both experiencing a sense of satisfaction with life, and acquiring appropriate capabilities to achieve a good quality of life. This conceptualisation is consistent with current developments across disciplines and with the views of stakeholder groups questioned at the beginning of the research programme. This broad conceptualisation of wellbeing is necessary to take into account the social context in which wellbeing is achieved.

12. Distribution of Total Personal Income before Tax (%)

13. Average Total Personal Income, by Gender, Age and Marital Status 60,862 40,000 Divorced 53,025 45,000 Widowed 66,230 45,000 Married/Partnered 60,204 40,103 Single Marital Status 68,038 35,000 60-64 68,635 45,000 55-59 62,067 45,000 50-54 64,142 48,511 45-49 65,370 45,000 40-44 Age Cohort 49,507 31,137 Female 79,292 56,912 Male Mean Income $ Median Income $ Gender

14. Total Value of Assets (not including family home) by Level of Ownership (%)

15. Subjective Assessment of Adequacy of Money by Personal Income (%)

16. Level of Overall Wellbeing by Personal Income (%)

17. Types of Housing Tenure (%)

18. Overall Wellbeing by Housing Tenure (%)

19. Types of Housing Tenure 65 to 84 years (%)

20. Private Dwelling Estimates by Tenure (%) 1 Includes dwellings owned by individuals or held in a family trust (from 2006) 28.9 66.9 30 June 2006 29.0 67.8 30 June 2001 25.6 70.5 30 June 1996 23.1 73.6 30 June 1991 Rented Owner–occupied 1 Period

21. Numbers below Poverty Thresholds from the EWAS and MSD Studies (%) 11 (ages 45-64) 10.8 60% constant value used in Social Report 18 (whole population) 12.6 60% of median 10 (whole population) 8.9 50% of median MSD: people EWAS: people aged 40-64 Poverty Threshold

22. Multivariate Logit Model of Poverty, using the 50% of Median Income Poverty Line * significant at 10% level; ** significant at 5% level, ** significant at 1% level, † comparator group is those with no assets, no respondents with more than $1.5 million in assets were poor with this poverty line, ‡ comparator group is married or partnered people. 0.007*** 0.4470 Home Owner (1 = yes) <0.001*** 10.8394 Divorced or Separated <0.001*** 19.3618 Widowed <0.001*** 16.2139 Single ‡ 0.845 0.8668 Non-Home Assets $1 million-$1.5 million 0.032* 0.0924 Non-Home Assets $500,000-$1 million 0.084* 0.4054 Non-Home Assets $250,000-$500,000 0.079* 0.3455 Non-Home Assets $100,000-$250,000 0.593 0.7866 Non-Home Assets $50,000-$100,000 0.147 0.5170 Non-Home Assets $0-$50,000 † 0.891 1.0399 Gender (1 = male) 0.010** 1.0582 Age p-value Odds Ratio Variable

23. Multivariate Logit Model of ‘Satisfaction with Economic Standard of Living’ * significant at 10% level; ** significant at 5% level, ** significant at 1% level, † comparator group is those with no assets, ‡ comparator group is married or partnered people. 0.251 1.2831 Home Owner (1 = yes) <0.001*** 0.4351 Divorced or Separated 0.001*** 0.2933 Widowed 0.074* 0.6086 Single ‡ 0.005*** 8.3967 Non-Home Assets over $2 million 0.056** 7.3526 Non-Home Assets $1.5 million-$2 million 0.003*** 5.2306 Non-Home Assets $1 million-$1.5 million <0.001*** 7.7721 Non-Home Assets $500,000-$1 million <0.001*** 4.3737 Non-Home Assets $250,000-$500,000 0.001*** 3.2419 Non-Home Assets $100,000-$250,000 0.009*** 2.2571 Non-Home Assets $50,000-$100,000 0.089* 1.5496 Non-Home Assets $0-$50,000 † 0.068* 1.000006 Income 0.020** 0.6625 Gender (1 = male) 0.097* 1.0218 Age p-value Odds Ratio Variable

24. Multivariate Ordered Logit Model of Overall Wellbeing * significant at 10% level; ** significant at 5% level, ** significant at 1% level, † comparator group is those with no assets, ‡ comparator group is married or partnered people. 0.322 0.1679 Home Owner (1 = yes) <0.001*** -0.9535 Divorced or Separated 0.001*** -1.1001 Widowed <0.001*** -1.2670 Single ‡ 0.091* 0.5799 Non-Home Assets over $2 million 0.924 0.0350 Non-Home Assets $1.5 million-$2 million 0.038** 0.5814 Non-Home Assets $1 million-$1.5 million 0.115 0.3099 Non-Home Assets $500,000-$1 million <0.001*** 0.7677 Non-Home Assets $250,000-$500,000 0.004*** 0.6079 Non-Home Assets $100,000-$250,000 0.023** 0.4894 Non-Home Assets $50,000-$100,000 0.016** 0.4902 Non-Home Assets $0-$50,000 † 0.049** 0.0000019 Income 0.001*** -0.4081 Gender (1 = male) 0.008*** 0.2317 Age p-value Coefficient Variable

27. http://www.ewas.net.nz/Publications/filesEWAS/EWAS_M2.pdf http://www.familycentre.org.nz/